New Hyper utility software

[Bill McLeod]

This may have been covered, I been away for awhile.

Does anyone know why Fuji, it appears, has removed the ability to
shoot the S3 from your computer? Since I shoot primarily
commercial I have been using this feature all the time. Unless I
am reading this wrong. I have tried with a friend that just
received his S3 and this feature is missing in the version he has,
but it is there for the S2.

--
GaryK

Seems to be working on my computer.

 

[earthbound_ca]

1. With HS-S2, if you select Custom Curve, the histogram is automatically clipped as if you were in STD Tone: with HS-V2, you can apply a custom curve to the ORG histogram. That's a HUGE difference. For proper file editing, the full histogram is a necessity... not a fanciful wish.

2. The histogram information and options are much more comprehensive.

3. Batch processing.

4. Files within a folder can be tagged for batching different batching processes.

5. RAW files have a blue icon that clearly identify their RAW nature.

6. EXIF information appears in a pane.

7. You can browse files in HS-V2.

8. Processing is much faster due to the improved interface.

9. RAF files can be compressed in HS-V2.

10. I'm sure my list isn't complete.

The S2 is a Fuji PRO camera, isn't it? RAW is for finest quality output, isn't it? It's beyond time Fuji make this improved tool available to its PRO-series shooters.

 

[Radu Grozescu]

8. Processing is much faster due to the improved interface.

Could you tell us some timings and some basic info about your computer ???

Thank you,

Radu Grozescu

http://www.RaduGrozescu.com
Corporate & Editorial Photography

 

[earthbound_ca]

Hi Radu,

By this, I mean that the improved interface (mostly being able to browse, batch, see RAFs clearly and have more effective tools at hand) leads to greater speed. The actual conversion of a RAF to TIFF (once the parameters are set) seems about the same. I hope this is clearer.

 

[Radu Grozescu]

The actual conversion of a RAF to
TIFF (once the parameters are set) seems about the same. I hope
this is clearer.

Thank you. But I am a D 100 / Capture user and I would like to compare workflows and speed.

Did you use Nikon Capture ? Could you provide some comparisons ?

Radu Grozescu

http://www.RaduGrozescu.com
Corporate & Editorial Photography

 

[earthbound_ca]

I would rate the Capture interface to be more comprehensive and better laid out. While DEE is painfully slow, at least it's there as are some other tools not found even in HS-V2. (not that these tools are needed all of the time... but they're nice to have)

Capture's batching is fast (faster) primarily because with my D70, for instance, I'm dealing with 5MB NEFs versus 12MB RAFs from the S2. The difference in file size can't be ignored. Not to snipe at the S3 but I don't see 25MB RAW files helping the situation much (to which some will argue that they use S3 JPEGs... but then aside from DR, is a D70 TIFF far different from an S3 TIFF (normal mode)? Between the D70 and S2, it's a little closer in my opinion than some are finding. In normal mode, I can't see the S3 being too far ahead other than benefits associated with 14 bit channels.

If I had 100 RAW files to process, I'd choose Nikon NEFs and Capture. As I had bought into the S2's better image (over the D100... it's only close competitor in price at the time), the advantages of HS-V2 over HS-S2 should not be dismissed lightly. HS-S2 is soooo bad it pretty well forced people to look at 3rd party alternatives if they were doing much volume shooting S2 RAW files. HS-V2 at least offers some valuable enhancements... although Fuji UK are telling Grant otherwise!

The good thing about both HS-V2 and Capture is that they result in less work in Photoshop. The same can't be said for HS-S2.

I hope this helps.

 

[Gary Kirkpatrick]

This may have been covered, I been away for awhile.

Does anyone know why Fuji, it appears, has removed the ability to
shoot the S3 from your computer? Since I shoot primarily
commercial I have been using this feature all the time. Unless I
am reading this wrong. I have tried with a friend that just
received his S3 and this feature is missing in the version he has,
but it is there for the S2.

--
GaryK

Seems to be working on my computer.

Allow me to clarify. The S3 software seems to only show the photo when tethered. I cannot fire the S3 from my computer as with the S2. The S2 software would allow control of camera settings from the computer also. The S3 settings seem to only be available at the camera. Both have their advantage and I would like to have the ability to choose the control I need, at the time needed. I have not been using the software since I wrote the inquiry. The computer Icon is missing when I am in the S3 control mode. Does yours have two Icons in the S3 contol mode?

--
GaryK

 

[grant Harris]

HI

Thanks for that I will reposnd to Fuji's letter and post their reply on the site.
Their reply to the letter I sent them, detailed in my post is as follows:

Thankyou for your letter regarding the HS-S2 software you purchased for your S2 Pro camera.

The HS-S2 software was specifically designed for use with the S2 and at the time there were no other Fuji cameras on the market which produced a raw file.

The HS-V2 software was produced at a time when several cameras producing raw files were on the market and several more planned so it was designed with a view to being upgraded. This upgrade is simply to make the software compatible with the new cameras and offers no additional functionality.

I hope this clarifies the matter for you

1. With HS-S2, if you select Custom Curve, the histogram is
automatically clipped as if you were in STD Tone: with HS-V2, you
can apply a custom curve to the ORG histogram. That's a HUGE
difference. For proper file editing, the full histogram is a
necessity... not a fanciful wish.

2. The histogram information and options are much more comprehensive.

3. Batch processing.

4. Files within a folder can be tagged for batching different
batching processes.

5. RAW files have a blue icon that clearly identify their RAW nature.

6. EXIF information appears in a pane.

7. You can browse files in HS-V2.

8. Processing is much faster due to the improved interface.

9. RAF files can be compressed in HS-V2.

10. I'm sure my list isn't complete.

The S2 is a Fuji PRO camera, isn't it? RAW is for finest quality
output, isn't it? It's beyond time Fuji make this improved tool
available to its PRO-series shooters.

 

[grant Harris]

Letter number 2 sent to Fuji UK

Dear Sir

RE: Fuji Hyper-utility for S2pro, your letter dated 19th Jan 2005, copy enclosed

Thank you for your letter regarding my complaint about the lack of an upgrade path for the HS-S2 software.

Despite your assurances that the HS-V2 rel 3 software adds no additional functionality my research shows that it offers the following advantages over HS-S2.

1. With HS-S2, if you select Custom Curve, the histogram is automatically clipped as if you were in STD Tone: with HS-V2, you can apply a custom curve to the ORG histogram. That's a HUGE difference. For proper file editing, the full histogram is a necessity.
2. The histogram information and options are much more comprehensive.
3. Batch processing.

4. Files within a folder can be tagged for batching different batching processes.
5. RAW files have a blue icon that clearly identify their RAW nature.
6. EXIF information appears in a pane.
7. You can browse files in HS-V2.
8. Processing is much faster due to the improved interface.
9. RAF files can be compressed in HS-V2.

So with these points in mind I would like you to address the main point of my original letter, which is why there is no upgrade path available for people who purchased HS-S2 rather than getting the free copy of HS-V2 given away with your consumer cameras?

Thanks for that I will reposnd to Fuji's letter and post their
reply on the site.
Their reply to the letter I sent them, detailed in my post is as
follows:

Thankyou for your letter regarding the HS-S2 software you purchased
for your S2 Pro camera.

The HS-S2 software was specifically designed for use with the S2
and at the time there were no other Fuji cameras on the market
which produced a raw file.

The HS-V2 software was produced at a time when several cameras
producing raw files were on the market and several more planned so
it was designed with a view to being upgraded. This upgrade is
simply to make the software compatible with the new cameras and
offers no additional functionality.

I hope this clarifies the matter for you

1. With HS-S2, if you select Custom Curve, the histogram is
automatically clipped as if you were in STD Tone: with HS-V2, you
can apply a custom curve to the ORG histogram. That's a HUGE
difference. For proper file editing, the full histogram is a
necessity... not a fanciful wish.

2. The histogram information and options are much more comprehensive.

3. Batch processing.

4. Files within a folder can be tagged for batching different
batching processes.

5. RAW files have a blue icon that clearly identify their RAW nature.

6. EXIF information appears in a pane.

7. You can browse files in HS-V2.

8. Processing is much faster due to the improved interface.

9. RAF files can be compressed in HS-V2.

10. I'm sure my list isn't complete.

The S2 is a Fuji PRO camera, isn't it? RAW is for finest quality
output, isn't it? It's beyond time Fuji make this improved tool
available to its PRO-series shooters.

 

[Joseph S Wisniewski]

I would rate the Capture interface to be more comprehensive and
better laid out. While DEE is painfully slow, at least it's there

There's no equivelant of DEE in Fuji's software?

Folks who have been doing HDR (high dynamic range) photography for years know that adjusting an image globally (applying tone curves, for example) results in pretty flat and boring images from HRD sources.

So they started creating "HDR rendering" or "tone mapping" algorithms that can "think globally, and act locally". The algorithms have names like "gradient domains". They first appeared in exotic software like HDRshop, but are now becoming widespread. Adobe added one to PhotoShop in the form of the Highlight/Shadow feature. Tone mapping algorithms are getting to be standard in raw converters, from Nikon with DEE, all the way down to Sigma with "digital fill light".

It doesn't make any sense that the S3 (or the earlier SR type P&S camreas) doesn't have something like that. They have greater dynamic range than more conventional cameras. That leaves Fuji with with two choices:

1) Process the SR images into conventionally mapped images with a relatively normal range of midtones, and compress whatever they get from SR into the extreme highlights and shadows. Problem is that this throws away most of what you paid for with SR.

2) Process the SR images to encompass the full range of the SR sensor, and pass the resulting "flat" images on to software that does do tone mapping, like PS CS.

Somehow, neither of these choices seems to have the appeal of the hypothetical...

3) Add tone mapping to the raw processing software.

--

Salvage troll posts! When you see a thread started by a troll, post something useful to it. It will drive the trolls up the wall.

Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 

[Joseph S Wisniewski]

I would rate the Capture interface to be more comprehensive and
better laid out. While DEE is painfully slow, at least it's there
as are some other tools not found even in HS-V2. (not that these
tools are needed all of the time... but they're nice to have)

Capture's batching is fast (faster) primarily because with my D70,
for instance, I'm dealing with 5MB NEFs versus 12MB RAFs from the
S2. The difference in file size can't be ignored.

You're right, the difference can't be ignored. The only problem is that the difference actually works in Fuji's favor.

Both cameras are 6mp. The S2 file is 16 bit integers (2 bytes/pixel), all ready to process as soon as they hith the raw converter.

The D70 file is compressed, and needs to be decompressed. First, it needs LZW decompression. Then a lookup table to undo the dynamic range compression. After all that, you've got 16 bit integers, just like what you started with on the Fuji.

So the upshot is that the bigger Fuji files should fly, compared to the Nikon files.

I'd say the "real" reason the Nikon software runs faster than the Fuji is that Nikon supports millions of users with their software, and Fuji 10's of thousands. So Nikon has more R&D budget to optimize software, UI, etc.

Not to snipe at
the S3 but I don't see 25MB RAW files helping the situation much

I quite agree. Combining two "overlaid" raw files into one coherent high dynamic range image is not easy. I wouldn't expect any raw processioing software to fly through S3 files.

--

Salvage troll posts! When you see a thread started by a troll, post something useful to it. It will drive the trolls up the wall.

Ciao!

Joe

http://www.swissarmyfork.com

 

[earthbound_ca]

Hey Joe,

If you hadn't pointed out these posts in your message to BJN (re: Thom's S3 review) I'd likely have overlooked them. Good points all around. I agree that Nikon's NEF faces the decompression hurdle which skews one's expectation of performance toward favoring the S2's RAF but it doesn't quite work that way... particularly with Fuji's original HS-S2 interface where RAW files are loaded from a viewing application, Finepix Viewer which is similar to Nikon View vis-a-vis Capture 4. .

Concerning Nikon, certainly an uncompressed NEF would load faster in Capture than is the case now and, having lived with Fuji's 12MB RAWs, I'd have tolerated uncompressed NEFs... but I suspect most D70 users would prefer the ability to maximize storage space. 35MB S3 RAW files are of another magnitude altogether! Driving at the performance issue, however, again, I'd argue the Capture experience is faster overall due to the comprehensive interface... particularly relative to Fuji's original HS-S2 software where additional PP is (for me) a certainty. At least Fuji's more recent HS-V2 gives the user a fighting chance of producing a competent TIFF.

As for Fuji's software (pick a version!), you are correct that tone mapping is not an option... but it's competitively priced! ;-) Lots of S2 users have been contentedly using ACR for the purpose of dynamic range enhancement, quite frankly. As S3 users will point out, why post-process if you can obtain a good in-camera capture: can't disagree there either. If tone mapping were included in HS-V2 (the newer Fuji software) at this point in time, it would add even less incentive for S2 users (who should be among Fuji's easier target markets) to consider migrating to the S3. Why retrofit something, however, when you can sell a whole new product? To be fair, the S3 offers enhancements over the S2 beyond DR. To some, the enhancements (in aggregate) justify the purchase. I'll stop on that point as it leads merely to questioning Fuji's value proposition WRT to the S3. This forum has discussed that ad nauseum: no point dissecting it again.

As for how 3rd party converters stack up WRT the S3 and its 25MB wide-DR RAW files, since those who are buying the S3 are gearing toward JPEG captures for the most part (and while I can't accurately predict the market for 3rd party S3 converters), I'd suspect that demand will be limited at best. Certainly interesting times in digital imaging. Best regards.

--
Equipment is not the ONLY issue. It's allSO about vision.